1. Field of the Invention
This invention pertains to a method and an apparatus for pouring liquid from a vessel, more particularly to a pouring head for pouring alcoholic beverages from individual bottles such as frequently seen in bars, night clubs, and restaurants.
2. The Prior Art
The prior art in pouring heads for pouring from bottles is exemplified by the following:
U.S. Pat. No. 3,321,113 Conroy 5/67 PA1 U.S. Pat. No. 3,630,419
This prior art, both in documental patent form and in commercial embodiment, has been the subject of various shortcomings. The pertinent prior art is characterized in having a pouring spout using at least one of normally two metal balls to provide a hydraulically controlled shut-off of the dispense pour for giving a predetermined quantity of liquid per pour. A specific example is a one (1) ounce pour which is routinely referred to as a "shot."
The prior art has a history of erratic variation in poured quantity between successive pours, a history of delivering frequent or occasional "short-shots", and a history of structural and breakage problems.
These pourers typically have a body with a front spout and a rear inlet pipe, a ball valve in the inlet pipe, a dump cap secured to the back end of the inlet pipe, a latch ball in the dump cap, and a cork to secure the pourer in the mouth of a beverage bottle. The beverage bottle is normally upright and is inverted over a glass to pour a unit of beverage into the glass. The body and dump cap usually have an air vent pipe for allowing air into the bottle. Frequently the spout outlet is covered by a normally closed flap to prevent insect egress and evaporation of liquid product. Among the specific problems of these pourers are the following:
Firstly, the corks are used solely to seal the body to the bottle, and hold the pourer in the bottle. In order to extract a pourer from the bottle, the spout of the pourer is grasped and pulled. Some pourers are provided with collars that go over the bottle neck in which case the collar is grasped and pulled. In both instances the inlet pipe is frequently stretched, cracked, bent or broken, usually at the liquid ports which are usually inside the collar and the weakest structure of the pourer. There is no way to apply a torque or pull to the collar other than firstly applying the torque or pull to the spout. When any stretching, cracking, bending, or breaking occurs, the pourer is functionally destroyed. The prior art pourers have also been difficult to remove, particularly for smaller people, and have been fingernail breakers and finger cutters.
Within the function and structure of the pourers, the dump cap has historically been a problem. Firstly the existing art is to injection mold the body and the dump cap of the same or similar plastics, and solvent weld them together with a solvent such as MEK, or to sonic weld them together. There has historically been problems with solvent overflow, not enough solvent, too much solvent, melt overflow from sonic welding, air and/or liquid leakage in the joints, incomplete bonding or welding, and breakage of the dump cap. The solvent or sonic welded area has been vulnerable to subsequent attack by alcohol and the relatively exotic trace chemicals in liquor. Subsequent stress cracking is well known. Further, the typical dump cap has used a four finger molded retainer to capture the latch ball valve. The four fingered ball valve retainer is not 100% reliable, and when bottle and pourer are slammed back down upon a counter the latch ball valves have fallen out and into the bottle of beverage. There has been litigation wherein such a fallen out latch ball valve was served to a consumer in purchased beverage, probably poured after the broken pourer was removed from the bottle. It has also become known to applicant that one of the many reasons for short-shot pours, is that the latch ball valve has had an implied angle of ninety (90.degree.) degrees, has been in a relatively hard and rigid plastic material, and that the latch ball valve is not properly and immediately seating, but rather is jumping around on and off of the latch valve seat in the dump cap. Further yet it has been found that the shut-off ball valve is sticking to its seat in the dump cap and is never falling and therefore the pourer never shuts-ff. It has also been found that any one of the four fingers jointly holding the latch ball valve may break off, and the pourer is destroyed.
It has also been found that control of the ball shut-off valve in the body has been erratic. The causes have been found to be erratic fluid sealing of the ball to the base of the inlet pipe.
Further, prior structure has required hand labor intensive assembly processes relying upon the discretion and repetitive capabilities of assemblers. Quality has been erratic and defects excessive.
The methods and structure for admission of air into the bottle as liquid is poured out have been found to be too variable, and the cause of variation in shot size. Most prior art has an always open air pipe. One example of prior art has a solenoid controlled air valve.
The prior flapper valves on the spout outlet have also caused problems, sticking either open or closed, and occasionally interfering with flow out of the spout.
It has also been fount that because of the control or latch valve seat, the pourer has to be tilted at least forty-five (45.degree.) degrees or one half of the included angle of the valve seat before the control valve will positively operate, if the valve does not properly close the pourer will short shot.